COVID-19 meta-analyses: a scoping review and quality assessment

Abstract

Objective: To carry out a scoping review of the meta-analyses published regarding about coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), evaluating their main characteristics, publication trends and methodological quality. Methods: A bibliometric search was performed in PubMed ® , Scopus and Web of Science, focusing on meta-analyses about COVID-2019 disease. Bibliometric and descriptive data for the included articles were extracted and the methodological quality of the included metaanalyses was evaluated using A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews. Results: A total of 348 meta-analyses were considered eligible. The first meta-analysis about COVID-19 disease was published on February 26, 2020, and the number of meta-analyses has grown rapidly since then. Most of them were published in infectious disease and virology journals. The greatest number come from China, followed by the United States, Italy and the United Kingdom. On average, these meta-analyses included 23 studies and 15,200 participants. Overall quality was remarkably low, and only 8.9% of them could be considered as of high confidence level. Conclusion: Although welldesigned meta-analyses about COVID-19 disease have already been published, the majority are of low quality. Thus, all stakeholders playing a role in COVID-19 deseases, including policy makers, researchers, publishers and journals, should prioritize well-designed meta-analyses, performed only when the background information seem suitable, and discouraging those of low quality or that use suboptimal methods.

Characteristics of registered and published systematic reviews focusing on the prevention of COVID-19: a meta-research study

“… 14–16 Taking into account the time pressure and often an inadequate research infrastructure, many of these problems have been amplified in COVID-19 research. 6–10 Moreover, a lacking critically scientific validation by peer review may particularly impact the large number of preprint publications. 17 …”

“…There have been several investigations (meta-research projects) on PROSPERO registrations 3–5 and also on published systematic reviews of COVID-19. 6–10 These meta-research studies focused on different methodological aspects, including the external validity of the research questions. Moreover, they often revealed poor reporting in COVID-19 research, both at the protocol stage and of the published systematic review.…”

Systematic reviews and meta-analyses during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic

“…The article "Meta-analyses on COVID-19: scoping review and quality analysis", (1) published in this journal, shows its relevance when planning meta-analysis and carrying out pertinent discussion about the role of this type of methodology in the current pandemic.…”

“…Nonetheless, this type of study demands a continuous and active workflow, with coordinated effort over extended periods by the review team, searching for new articles. (8,9) Pires et al (1) published a scoping review. This type of review is a research synthesis that aims to map the existing literature on a particular topic or research area to identify key concepts and knowledge gaps.…”

“…(12) A critical view is important to know the advantages and disadvantages of using preprints, rapid reviews, living systematic reviews and scoping reviews. Considering the articles analyzed in the study by Pires et al, (1) it was found that, although the tool used identified some metaanalyses of better quality, most studies had mediocre quality and would bring more damage than benefits when used for decision-making. Literature reviews are crucial to identify the state-of-the-art and evidence gaps of the study object and enable targeting the specificities of study methodologies to offer more accurate answers, especially in the unprecedented condition of COVID-19.…”